Discussion If you were to take over Champion Data, What would you change?

[buttox]

Ok first thing Id do is feed the monkeys more bananas when they reward Hurn points.

extra points for quad girth?

 

[WaynesWorld19]

less bloody articles about who to trade in and how to pick a starting team, too many teams are the same at the start of the year

That's how the HS get a return on their investment .....they want you reading their articles

 

[clogwearer]

That's how the HS get a return on their investment .....they want you reading their articles

I'm pretty sure they get a return on their investment every time those ******* dead chicken parts rain down from the sky.

 

[Maybe Tomorrow]

More transparency with the scoring would help, but I wonder if a lot of the frustration expressed on these boards is because coaches (me included) don't really understand the scoring system. We all get annoyed when our players don't score the points we think they deserve, but there is often a reason for it. That and the lag on FanFooty leads to a lot of melting.

I like the idea they post specific players scoring on a particular weekend, that would help educate us and clear up a lot of the KOTD talk.

Don't agree with removing the maximum points cap. They could change it to a range maybe, but with no upper limit we'll all have 8 bulldogs players and teams would get very similar. The more valid POD's the better.

100% agree about rookie prices not changing after 1 or 2 games at the end of the season. This would help a lot, and wouldn't effect many players anyway. But that's more a HS thing anyway isn't it? CD don't set the prices.

 

[Sydney Kicker]

Train a few people how to score a SC game (using video of non AFL games as an example) living in someplace that has never heard of footy. Like Chad or Uzbekistan. Then put them in a room and get them to score a real AFL game with the volume (crowd noise and commentators) set to zero. Then compare the scores with the SC staff allocated scores.

Bonts season average would fall at least 15 points.

Seriously:

• Positive points for a professional free kick conceded to slow down the play.
• Disposals made under pressure should not be scored so harshly when ineffective.
• A person who gets first hands on the ball at a stoppage only to be tackled instantly forcing another stoppage should get the same or similar points as the guy that makes the tackle.
• Kickouts worth less.
• Not sure about what happens when a spud on the other end of a good pass falls over or gets beaten pointlessly by his opponent but I get the feeling that the passer gets harshly treated in situations such as this - should be reassessed
• Less weighting at so called critical points in games

 

[Cookiemon]

Dismiss




Hire

 

[Obese Arachnid]

Dismiss




Hire

 

[Hai_Newman]

Dismiss




Hire

 

[Sherman41]

I would agree with ineffective disposals being awarded for rushed kicks out of congestion etc.
If the player has no option other than to dump kick the ball under pressure then it shouldn’t matter who it goes to.

Taranto and Cripps perfect examples of players with lots of contested possessions being punished for it after having first hands on the ball.

Do players still get points for clearances regardless of whether it’s effective or not? This used to be a huge strength for Cripps scoring. Then if it was effective it was worth the add on points. Ineffective and it was still like +5 for a clearance.

 

[Hai_Newman]

Hire

 

[Loose at HB]

I would agree with ineffective disposals being awarded for rushed kicks out of congestion etc.
If the player has no option other than to dump kick the ball under pressure then it shouldn’t matter who it goes to.

Taranto and Cripps perfect examples of players with lots of contested possessions being punished for it after having first hands on the ball.

Do players still get points for clearances regardless of whether it’s effective or not? This used to be a huge strength for Cripps scoring. Then if it was effective it was worth the add on points. Ineffective and it was still like +5 for a clearance.

I don't think clearances have ever been a source of scoring. Gather from hitout/hard ball gets are which are the nitty gritty of clearances and obviously if it's an effective clearance it's almost always an effective possession which boosts their scoring.

For example hardball get (4.5 pts) + effective handball (1.5) = 6 points for a good handball if you've won the ball in dispute. But if CD deemed the handball to be a clanger its -4 so your net is 0.5 and you may as well have not won the pill to start with.

 

[rocker_oz33]

Price changes after 3 games re rookies that play the random 1 or 2 games late in the year.
More DPP players.

 

[THECHIEFTON]

People want Taranto to get more points.

He's a rubbish kick. Deal with it.

 

[Sherman41]

I don't think clearances have ever been a source of scoring. Gather from hitout/hard ball gets are which are the nitty gritty of clearances and obviously if it's an effective clearance it's almost always an effective possession which boosts their scoring.

For example hardball get (4.5 pts) + effective handball (1.5) = 6 points for a good handball if you've won the ball in dispute. But if CD deemed the handball to be a clanger its -4 so your net is 0.5 and you may as well have not won the pill to start with.

Maybe I was thinking about dream team fantasy. Thanks For the clarification, I still think there’s a difference between a contested possession or hard ball get and a clearance though which could be differentiated.
I completely agree around rookies playing under 3 gamesand their prices staying the same.

 

[THECHIEFTON]

Rookies should all be under 140k. Paying 200k for a high draft pick rookie is stupid.

 

[WaynesWorld19]

For example hardball get (4.5 pts) + effective handball (1.5) = 6 points for a good handball if you've won the ball in dispute. But if CD deemed the handball to be a clanger its -4 so your net is 0.5 and you may as well have not won the pill to start with.

Doubt in this scenario CD would deem that play a clanger .....moreso an ineffective handball = 0 points
So the points for the hardball get would remain & not be diluted

How Points Are Scored

Effective kick = 4 Points
Ineffective kick = 0 Points
Clanger = -4 Points
Effective Handball = 1.5 Points
Ineffective handball = 0 Points
Handball clanger = -4 Points
Handball receive = 1.5 Point
Hardball get = 4.5 Points

I do believe the point scoring system hasn't been adjusted for changes in the rules, like playon from kickouts .....points should be allocated in exactly the same manner as kicking out from the square

 

[WaynesWorld19]

So far there hasn't been a lot of suggestions that address buttox 's question .....how to keep Coach's engaged in the game longer in seasons ......surely this is an issue that the HS see's as a priority over improving the scoring system .....self interests of HS

 

[Andrew Birch]

I'm pretty sure they get a return on their investment every time those ******* dead chicken parts rain down from the sky.

Imagine being a vegan SC? (does such a person even exist?) The melts would be delicious.

 

[Suns of Anarchy]

So far there hasn't been a lot of suggestions that address buttox 's question .....how to keep Coach's engaged in the game longer in seasons ......surely this is an issue that the HS see's as a priority over improving the scoring system .....self interests of HS

I’ll use my workplace as an example. Years ago everyone was playing it and obsessed. I’ve watched most of them drift away and they all use the same excuse that it’s too time consuming now.
Definitely a lot more strategic with VC loops, trading during the rounds, etc.
I prefer it now myself, but even then I’m down 600+ points through work commitments where I miss late outs, unable to capitalise on a decent VC score.

 

[Andrew Birch]

So far there hasn't been a lot of suggestions that address buttox 's question .....how to keep Coach's engaged in the game longer in seasons ......surely this is an issue that the HS see's as a priority over improving the scoring system .....self interests of HS

Why are you always so concerned with News Corp's bottom line? Their business model's success hardly depend on the number of SC participants. As far as I'm concerned the more coaches that give up at the first sign of adversity, the better off committed players such as the splendid kenties herein are. Winner winner chicken dinner. Free socks & zingers for everyone.

 

[Andrew Birch]

All players aged 32+ before Rd1 receive a 5% "boomer degen" discount.

 

[Loose at HB]

Doubt in this scenario CD would deem that play a clanger .....moreso an ineffective handball = 0 points
So the points for the hardball get would remain & not be diluted


I do believe the point scoring system hasn't been adjusted for changes in the rules, like playon from kickouts .....points should be allocated in exactly the same manner as kicking out from the square

You have way too much faith in CD my friend if you think they don’t pay some first possessions at stoppages as clangers. I agree there’s a lot of “ineffective” clearances (ie dump kick 30m around the body to a 50/50) but there’s absolutely a fair portion that get paid as clangers.

For me I think the biggest problem with scoring for kicks is that there’s no reward for difficulty - lets take 2 players. One takes a mark in the back pocket from a kick in, the other takes a mark later in the chain on half back.

Player 1 chips the ball back to the original kicker in the goalsquare. They get +2 for the uncontested mark, +4 for an effective kick. Total +6 and the game has gone nowhere.

Player 2 rips a 45m bullet into the corridor which opens up the game and initiates a scoring chain. +2 for uncontested mark, +4 effective kick. Total +6 yet their disposal has had infinitely more impact than the seagull getting his chip in D50.

There needs to be something that takes into account the level of difficulty for a given possession but again I think until we have Opta level insight it’s going to remain a bit frustrating and seagull friendly

 

[buttox]

I’ll use my workplace as an example. Years ago everyone was playing it and obsessed. I’ve watched most of them drift away and they all use the same excuse that it’s too time consuming now.
Definitely a lot more strategic with VC loops, trading during the rounds, etc.
I prefer it now myself, but even then I’m down 600+ points through work commitments where I miss late outs, unable to capitalise on a decent VC score.

Getting rid of VC loop, emergency's and the reverse changes trade loop would be a good start.
The reverse changes loop is a good example. I played the game more than 10 years before i found out about it.
That is crap.
the rules should be laid out plain and simple.
Without those 3 It would be a much easier game to learn.

 

[Andrew Birch]

Does anyone have any suggestions on how to make the game harder instead of easier?

 

[buttox]

Does anyone have any suggestions on how to make the game harder instead of easier?

Well that is a reason given for people quitting.
I think its a valid one.
It shouldnt come down to who has 168 hours a week to dedicate to there team.
We need a middle ground.
Getting rid of captains loophole actually makes it harder.
picking a decent captain becomes harder.
No second chances.
same with emergency's.